Holopedium acidophilum Rowe, Adamowicz & Hebert, 2007, n. sp.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Holopedium acidophilum n. sp. Etymology. acidophilum refers to the apparent restriction of populations of this species to acidic bogs, ponds, and lakes. Type locality. Red Rock Pond, New Brunswick, Canada (45.233º N, 66.733º W), which is located near St. George, NB. It is situated north of Lake Utopia. From Hwy 785, turn onto Red Rock Lake Road. This road bifurcates 3.5 km later. Take the right fork. Proceed 2.9 km to Red Rock Pond which is on the right hand side of the gravel road. Type specimens. Holotype: an ovigerous female in ethanol deposited in the CMN under accession number CMNC 2007-0738 (collection date June 13, 1992). Paratypes: 10 ovigerous females, preserved in ethanol, deposited in the CMN under accession number CMNC 2007-0739 (collection date June 13, 1992). Material examined. Other habitats with H. acidophilum are listed in Appendix A. Morphological description. FEMALE. Representative photomicrographs are shown in Fig. 9. The jelly coat is of the A type, in which the anterior jelly curl arches toward the anterior portion of the jelly coat, and the lateral lobes are undivided (see Montvilo et al. 1987). Adult carapace lengths range from 0.62–1.46 mm (mean 1.10 mm), while carapace heights range from 0.24–1.48 mm (mean 1.08 mm). The H/L ratios range from 0.40–1.29 (mean 0.97). The ventral carapace margin is ordinarily spinulated posteriorly, but smooth anteriorly. Individuals lacking spinulation along the entire ventral valve margin were encountered. Anal spine number ranges from 8–21 (mean 14.07). Holopedium acidophilum lacks a basal spine on each postabdominal claw. Each claw invariably has a row of denticles running laterally from the base of the claw to its midpoint. MALE. Males were found in the type locality (Red Rock Pond, NB) from collections made in June and September over several years. Body lengths range from 0.40–0.91 mm. The ventral carapace margin is spinulated posteriorly, but smooth anteriorly. Males possess 9–17 anal spines. Holopedium acidophilum lacks a basal spine on each postabdominal claw. Each claw invariably has a row of denticles running laterally from the base of the claw to its midpoint. Differential diagnosis. H. acidophilum can be distinguished from H. amazonicum and H. atlanticum by its larger size and greater number of anal spines. It differs from both members of the H. gibberum species complex by its lack of a basal spine on the postabdominal claw. Holopedium acidophilum can be biochemically distinguished from H. atlanticum at the Pgm locus. Holopedium acidophilum possesses an allele that migrates faster than the allele present in H. atlanticum. COI mtDNA sequence divergence between H. acidophilum and H. amazonicum averages 8.7%, while the divergence between H. acidophilum and H. atlanticum averages 10.6%. Based on current evidence, individuals showing less than 6% divergence from a representative COI mtDNA sequence (GenBank AF 245352) belong to H. acidophilum. Distribution. Holopedium acidophilum appears to be restricted to a narrow latitudinal range (43º to 47º N) spanning North America (Fig. 4 d). This species was not found to co-occur with other species of Holopedium. Despite concentrated sampling within this range, this species was found rarely. It occurred in three lakes and one pond on the west coast of Oregon, a small pond on the upper Michigan peninsula, and two bogs in southeastern New Brunswick. The eastern bog habitats were situated within a few kilometers of lake populations of both H. glacialis and H. atlanticum, but there was no evidence of genetic exchange as indicated by distinctive allozyme and mtDNA profiles. In the west, H. acidophilum was found in coastal lakes and ponds in Oregon, while the nearest populations of H. glacialis were in lakes in the Coastal Mountains. Breeding system. Males were detected in the eastern populations in mid June and late September, indicating that members of these populations are cyclical parthenogens. Males were not detected in western and central populations, but this was likely because they were sampled in the summer. Moreover, genotype frequencies were generally concordant with Hardy-Weinberg expectations.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.004 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".